[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090110165033.GA23943@logfs.org>
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 17:50:33 +0100
From: Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: David Brown <lkml@...idb.org>, Phil Oester <kernel@...uxace.com>,
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
Phillip Lougher <phillip@...gher.demon.co.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Squashfs pull request for 2.6.29
On Sat, 10 January 2009 13:43:35 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> What does a performance hit have to do with an ABI? Absolutely nothing -
> if such a bug is noticed it is fixed, that's it. Your argument does not
> parse and makes absolutely zero technical sense.
>
> Your "ABI is forever" objection against a _read only_ filesystem is a
> newbie mistake worthy of cookie file inclusion - i had a real good laugh
> when i read it ;-)
Thank you, glad to be of service. Should I have picked an example where
the code becomes horribly convoluted and there is nothing you can do
about it?
But since I am clearly the newbie, could you try to teach my stupid ass
instead of just ridiculing it? What is the thing that makes a read only
filesystem special? And why does everyone believe that I am arguing
against merging squashfs when I'm not?
Jörn
--
The only real mistake is the one from which we learn nothing.
-- John Powell
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists